Who Might Direct GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY?

If this is true, I'm all for it. According to Hollywood Reporter, Disney/Marvel is in talks with James Gunn to direct GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY. The article states that Gunn is the studio's choice to direct - Gunn has the real talent to mix terrific action with a real sense of comedy, and he brings it together and makes it work. All that's left is for Gunn to sign on the line that is dotted.

Thank goodness for Joss Whedon's creative involvement, huh? I doubt this wouldn't have happened if Whedon didn't help steer these movies right now. James Gunn would be a fantastic choice, in my opinion. He's got a real playful sense of direction and he's not afraid to let his movies go to the most unlikely places, as his work with Troma, as well as SLITHER and SUPER, would suggest. A Troma director on a tentpole Marvel release? That sounds almost too good to be true.

Marvel continues to impress me with their choices for the talent with their projects. I adore SLITHER and SUPER, and TROMEO AND JULIET, which Gunn helped write, might be the best film in Troma's catalog. He also wrote the first SCOOBY DOO movie, but his script was truer to the original show than what wound up on screen. I still think the DAWN OF THE DEAD remake that he wrote is a fine entry into the zombie genre - it's different enough from Romero's original movie that it has a spirit all its own.

If this pans out, congratulations to James Gunn for landing this movie. If there's anyone who can make you believe a raccoon can kick ass, it's James Gunn.

I am an old school Marvel fan, but I have little interest in the Guardians of the Galaxy, as a comic book or a movie.
I am worried that this could be Marvel's Waterloo: a critical failure.
Guardians of the Galaxy is not anywhere in the same league as the Avengers.
I would rather see any number of other Marvel properties filmed other than GotG: Heroes for Hire, the Defenders, many stand-alone superheroes (Black Panther, Daredevil, Doctor Strange), hell, even the Inhumans.
I don't understand why Marvel wants to film this fairly obscure and rather unexciting property. Can anyone explain it to me?

They want to setup Thanos and the cosmic Marvel content. GOTG has the closest ties to that (unless you want to directly involve Kree/Skrull content (which i suspect they're holding off on for now- Secret Invasion can happen later) in which case then Inhumans is a valid alternative).

They seem to have a directiuon they're heading in. At D23 last year during the Marvel Studios portion of the Disney Features panel, they discussed Phase 1, Phase 2 and the end of Phase 3 ending in a MASSIVE Marvel movie event.
They have a plan... and I've never been so excited!

you've done it again, Marvel. I am truly impressed by this choice. Gunn is adept at humor, violence, creature effects, and he LOVES the genre. Might have to dust off my copy of 'The Specials' tonight.
Well played!

...this is lightyears from SLITHER and SUPER in terms of budget and scope. I have no doubt that he can write it, but directing a production of that size is going to require a serious learning curve. I do hope he can pull it off.

Since he poo-pooed Nolan doing Batman, I'm making it my mission (and hoping to make it a running thing on AICN like Brian Cox and Fact!) that Cronenberg be suggested for every superhero popcorn movie that comes along until someone nags him into doing one (Swamp Thing reboot?).

...that it took Marvel comics decades to perfect. Multi-title crossovers? BIG EVENT followed up by BIGGER EVENT, leading to BIGGEST EVENT EVER (until the next BIG EVENT)?
That's right, casual movie-watcher, you have to see 'Thor 2' to understand who this guy in 'Hulk 4' is and why he's got a beef with Character X in 'Iron Man 5' and why it's all going to come to a head in 'Avengers 3'. I mean... it won't take long before people start thinking, "Oh, fuck this for a game of soldiers, I just wanted to watch a movie for a couple of hours, now I need a fucking degree in comic character history to understand this shit."

Gunn said on a recent DLM podcast that he's "never seen a GOOD comic book movie." So yeah, REALLY loves the genre. *Roll eyes. Perhaps this would be a chance for him to nut up and show Joss and Nolan how it's really done. *Eyeroll loud enough to hear.

It was like Gunn decided Kick-Ass needed to be remade as a skeevy mess and he had enough blackmail chits on half of Hollywood to get them to appear in it. Other than Ellen Page's lunatic performance and the brilliance of the catchphrase, "SHUT UP, CRIME!", there's no there there.
Marvel better keep him on a tight leash, otherwise they should just make a pile of cash totaling $100 million and set it on fire.

The Marvel Universe is playing out like something we once thought only a mini series on HBO/AMC/Whatever could pull off. Everything up to now was Season 1 with the Avengers movie being the season final. Season 2 will bring new characters and broaden the scope of the story.
If Marvel pulls this off they will be very VERY wealthy.

Marvel is simply translating their content into movies and building from one product to another, and if you think they aren't allready very VERY wealthy, you haven't been watching the box office results, especially for The Avengers.

That being said I know absolutely nothing about Guardians of the Galaxy or the characters/stories (I don't read comics). I find the idea of an anthropomorphic raccoon living in the same cinematic universe as Iron Man and co. to be a tough pill to swallow (far more than Norse gods, even), but nothing's impossible. I'm interested, at least.

There seem to be alot of people who know nothing about the source material saying it sucks. Now granted, thats understandable, GOTG has never been at the top of any popularity list as far as comics, although its never been at the bottom either. But believe me, take it from a comic reader with impeccable taste who has read every issue of these guys over the past 5 years: not only is it good, its one of the best things Marvel has produced over the past 10 years. And you know what the best thing about it is? Obviously, with a giant tree man and a gun slinging raccoon, there is a suspension of disbelief. But the cool thing is, they take it really seriously when you expect them to go funny, and go funny when you expect them to go serious (I mean this in the best possible way). Its played neither 100% tongue in cheek (which would deflate any attention), nor 100% serious (which would of course be absurd, its a gun slinging bad ass cursing raccoon). None of you will ever believe this, but Im 100% serious in a non ironic way: some of the best, most dramatic and serious moments Ive read have been in that book. The few of you who have read Annihilation know what Im talking about.

Note that Captain Hammer ha already been a leading man for Gunn's work on Slither. Given the Joss connection, who once called Nathan Fillion the next Harrison Ford (while GotG is being compared to Star Wars), I think I see some ideal casting here. And, on a side note, I think Rocket Racoon's voice should come from Alan Tudyk....

One of my favorite comic series from the cosmic corner of Marvel was Guardians of the Galaxy. It was an awesome series, with great characters, that was thoroughly enjoyable. If people are going to attack the Guardians of the Galaxy, at least read some of the graphic novels before you do. There is nothing worse than uninformed ignorance. In other words, you have no right to an opinion if you actually haven't read the work. And by the way, that raccoon kicks some serious ass. Give GotG a chance, I think you will be surprised. Also, Gunn is a great choice in my opinion. I hope it comes to fruition.

It's new, it's relatively unknown, and it's DIFFERENT from what they have already done. What were they going to do, make ANOTHER costumed hero origin story? This can go in so many directions, and I am frankly impressed that they are willing to take a chance on something as off-the-wall as this.

can you even imagine Arnold trying to get a proper handle on that "Grand, speechify"style dialog that Thanos casually employs with such menacingly dreadful relish..fucking hilarious, even more so than "Hobbit bane" on top of the tumbler in front of blackgate prison

I never liked the Wolverine type "I'm badass, everybody look at me! I have a cigar!" character, but as a furry gun toting raccoon, I think we have a winner. Real comic book goodness. After the goofy fun of the Avengers became such a success, the doors are open to more out there comic book weirdness. I'm curious to see, how far into the rabbit hole they can drag the audience. (One day, maybe we'll get to see S.W.O.R.D. and A.R.M.O.R. the silliest, yet coolest Marvel concepts in the cinematic MU. Would be awesome.)

Most of the characters in The Avengers, people are at least visually familiar with even if they don't know the stories. Guardians though is too "out there" for the average joe, I jut can't see the masses plonking money down for an ass kicking raccoon.

Why are they messing with the Avengers universe with these clowns? Thanos needs to first appear in Avengers, not in Guardians of Galaxy. This is freaking stupid. If that little raccoon shows up in Avengers, I'm gonna flip.

The 1970's 24 issue Godzilla original comic book by Marvel fucking rocked.
Give me Dum Dum Duggan chasing after Godzilla - and throw in Red Ronin for good measure
Fuck yeah!
Who the hell wants a dumbass Guardians of the Galaxy movie?

OK since a few seem confused or uninspired by the thought of Marvel making a movie based on their newer GotG series. Here's what sums it up in a nutshell. GotG is basically a "Dirty Dozen" type story set in the cosmic / space side of the Marvel Universe. As such it is almost tailor made to turn into a movie. It doesn't have a bunch of complicated back story or needed origin tales. It's a group of prisoners set up on a desperate suicide mission needed to turn the tide of a vast space opera type war. And yeah it's no characters you probably have ever heard of before. 70's and 80's D listers or worse. But the book was great. The basic idea is one that could work exceptionally well on screen. And who doesn't want to see an anthropomorphic talking Racoon with a really really big gun?

in the Marvel comics world (being a consumer mainly of the largest characters and not continually over time), I am actually willing to place complete trust in Marvel and in the many fans who say that this is a great property.
I had my doubts about Thor, Cap America and even Avengers, and they knocked those out of the park IMO. Now, I am willing to listen to the voices of so many fans who have read this comic and enjoyed it. (As opposed to most of the haters who seem to be exclusively people who have never read it).
I especially admire Marvel for its balls and its success rate with out-of-the-box ideas. I am looking forward to everything they have to offer in their upcoming films.... if they make any truly embarrassing false moves, I will be surprised.
Best of all, they are preserving the FUN in their comic movies that DC either can't generate with their films, or just aren't able to, due to corporate fear and/or stodgy characters.

First off, when Star Wars came out there had been nothing like it. Everyone was interested. Lord of the Rings had massive "brand power" from 60 of years of literary significance. If you honestly think Guardians of the Galaxy is going to do Avengers or Iron Man numbers even, you're kidding yourself. People on average will see yet another CGI laden - and it will be inevitably despite Gunn's adherence to Practical in Slither - big explosion movie with a talking raccoon. I'm sure it'll be great as a movie, but I'm also sure it won't do nearly as well as we would like.

Thor: This will bomb. Too weird for Average Joe.
Hulk: This will bomb. Average Joe has already seen Ang Lee's.
Captain America: This will bomb. Average Joe outside of the US will be appalled.
Avengers: This will bomb. (not sure why anyone thought this would bomb, but they did).
Guardians of the Galaxy: This will bomb. Average Joe isn't going to go see it.
See a pattern?

Once again, Marvel makes a inspired choice for their property. From what I've seen of Gunn's work, he has all the goods to make this work, much like Whedon did for the Avengers.
And for those who say Gunn has never handled a massive film like this and may not be able to, Whedon was in exactly the same boat taking on the Avengers and we all know how that turned out. Marvel has yet to make a wrong move in finding the right people for their films, so I am optimistic.

So, Ellen Page can play Mantis now, heh.
But Peyton Reed is my fave, loved his old-fashioned homage, "Down with Love" (BTW, Ewan McGregor, 10 years ago, was a near perfect Peter Quill). But maybe, one day, he will direct the Marvel Studios version of Fantastic Four...
Regarding the other news, I hope the pilot is Star-Lord. About the "unbelievers", in 2 years, GotG will be conquering the globe. Dogs will be wearing Cosmo suits, Rocket and Groot T-shirts and toys everywhere, awesome videogames, cool Star-Lord masks, kids will be playing Nova Corps, GotG's green skin will be the next Avatar's blue. And my favorite: the after credits surprise cameo appearence by...Cancerverse version of Nick Motherfrakkin' Fury!!
Cheers!

His scooby doo scripts suck. I'm sorry, what they were trash. I never read his Dawn of the Dead script, but I have a feeling that Snyder made it better than it was. I like Slither and I thought it was a good start of him moving in the right direction. Super was a step back for me. I thought it had too much cheesiness to it. Which is why it worries me that he's attached to this. I feel he's going to try to put too much humor into the movie. I started reading the comics and there is humor, but not really silly, corny humor. It just worries me. I'm not sold on him as a studio director.

His Alien 4 script sucked. I feel he's going to try to put too much humor into the movie. I started reading the comics and there is humor, but not really silly, corny humor. It just worries me. I'm not sold on him as a studio director.
.....

I was really excited when I heard they were making GOTG into a movie. I read the comics since #1 but stopped after a while. My only question is who the fuck are these characters? Where is the guy with the bow, the brain power guy, the big muscle guy??

seriously we have Edgar Wright doing Ant-man, like what the fuck seriously? that kicks MAJOR ass! Whedon on avengers 2, Farrelly bro's taking a crack at the captain..FUCKING SHANE BLACK ON IRON MAN 3, and mr. game of thrones Taylor (GAME OF FUCKING THRONES) on Thor 2, and now possibly James Gunn on Guardians???
AND all original cast members lined up for phase 2??
please, haters, fucking save it.

They had name value.
People may not have been into Thor et al before the films, but they were part of popular culture via cartoons and musicians co-opting songs (God of Thunder... Iron Man... etc.)
GOTG HAS NO NAME VALUE.
So yes, it IS more of a risk than any Marvel film to date. That's not to say it'll bomb, but there's a reason it's being made AFTER they've established the universe, and being built in as part of the whole.
It's also the reason why GOTG existing BEFORE a Black Panther film is genuinely insulting. I'm a white male, and even I think seeing a talking racoon on screen before Wakanda says a LOT about the unfortunate implications inherent in Marvel Studios!

This is going to be sick blad, wicked cool and all!
Can't wait to see that tree looking dude stomp on the heads of the aVengers. It's going to be amzing. And the director is Gun? Why not? Happily I'll buy a ticket. It's got a raccoon, so do I. MARAVEL!

...resulted in the #3 top-grossing film of all time this year."
Oh, indeed. They're absolutely not mistakes in the financial sense, the only sense that really counts, as far as Hollywood's concerned. So yes, they'll keep on making these 'mistakes' - and I'm sure every other movie studio in the world wishes it could make such 'mistakes'. Fully agreed on that.
My comment was regarding how long it would be before people started tiring of the whole "character crossover" and "huuuuuge event" way of doing things. The latter is one of the mistakes most series make: Each successive movie upping the ante, increasing the odds, piling on the danger, until... what? Where do you go from there? Save a city. Save a planet. Save the universe. This type of storytelling tends to shoot itself in the foot sooner rather than later.
Once you start making that mistake, you no longer need to place apostrophes around 'mistake' when it comes to the financial side of things.
As a Marvel fanboy, I worry that they're going to pull a 'Green Lantern' with this cosmic super-tie-in approach. And, perhaps, with all the movies being interlinked in a way we've never seen before, that could potentially harm more than a single title.

Aug. 19, 2012, 5:06 a.m. CST

by gregmss

Tho am surprized this gets a movie before Watchmen, when's that coming to theatres?

People are asking 'who cares about Guardians of the Galaxy?'
I dunno who cares. Were a bunch of people clamoring for an Iron Man movie? Not that I remember. But they made people want it. We should hope they can make people want the GotG and we should hope it's good.
These are probably the same people who complain about Hollywood cynicism not letting new ideas up on the screen. Granted, this doesn't really count as a new idea since it's an adaptation of a story from another medium. But I think it's exciting to see Marvel experimenting on this level with lesser known properties and stories, and we should all want it to be awesome instead of just assuming it's going to fail because 'hurr durr who's that.'

You want a truly great director who will deliver, it is Steven S. Deknight, the Executive Producer, Lead Writer, and Creator of TV's Spartacus. The man is just a revelation and take no prisoners genius! Joss personally knows him, and his abilities, as he once mentored him--and he should bring him in at all costs.

They might as well make that announcement now. One of Whedon's boys gets to be leader in a rag tag space team, to later team up with The Avengers. Who doesn't see this coming?
I'm cool with it I really like Nathan Fillion and I think it'd be great.

... was sold on James Cameron's name.
People know who Cameron is. The guys love Terminator and Aliens, the gals love Titanic. So he made a hybrid film of both, and behold it was loved. Not by me, I thought it was terrible, but it had a hook for people to pay money to see it.
Now GOTG may make a billion worldwide, but it's a completely different situation. As stands currently, it has no name value to mainstream America. Neither does James Gunn. So they're going to have to do an exceptional job marketing it, because if they don't then it's not going to make sufficient money.
That isn't even up for debate.
Green Lantern didn't make a lot, and that franchise HAS roots in popular culture (from John Stewart in the JL cartoon to DLC content made for DCUO Online, through to regular shout-outs on the Big Bang Theory.) Ask the average person in the street about GOTG, and dollars to doughnuts you'll get a blank look.
But if you had asked them about Iron Man before his film, and chances are AT THE VERY LEAST they'd go 'oh, isn't that a Black Sabbath song.'

I don't want any comic-book films to fail.
Well, that's not true. Kick-Ass 2 and Ghost Rider failing wouldn't bother me. But I'm happy we're in an age of such comic-book excess.
Sure I thought The Avengers was mediocre (it's Transformers, with better characters... and that's not really a compliment), but the success means they're going to be able to take more chances.
However, I resent the 'everyone thought everything else was a risk' retcon. Nothing Marvel Studios has done has been anywhere close to this risky, because it all had SOME name value. GOTG doesn't have any value to people who aren't hardcore comic-book readers. Hell, I read 20 to 30 comic-books a month, and haven't leapt into GOTG yet.
And I'm sure the comic-books are great, but if they can't sell 100,000 a month to comic-book fans...

The talkbacks were full of naysayers talking about how movies like THOR and Captain America wouldn't make money bc the former was too weird and was a character no one cared about and bc the latter was too jingoistic for modern audiences and foreign audiences to care about.
Let's not pretend that didn't happen.

Quality is irrelevent.
Transformers made serious dough, and was terrible. The problem with GL is that it wasn't marketed particularly well. As evidenced by them sponsoring an MCM event in London... but showing no footage. So people stared at awful posters, and thought 'hm, the fuck?"
Contrast that to The Avengers, which (despite being disappointing for me as a film) had some stunning trailers, lots of excellent promotion etc.

Again, the facts remain. People have complained about the strength of potential Marvel movies every time they are announced. That's a fact.
I agree, it's stupid nonsense logic bc not a single person here is a box office intellectual, as much as they'd like to pretend, therefore it's nonsensical for so many of them to try to claim a movie will be a bomb long before its released.

Transformers may not be a "great" movie, but it sure is more crowd-pleasing than Green Lantern was, which is why it had better word of mouth around average joes.
I will also admit that GL's marketing wasn't that stellar either.

I am a big DC fan and if Guardians works, then hopefully this will push WB away from trying to imitate Avengers with a Justice League movie and towards trying to imitate this - and by that I mean doing riskier stuff, which would be great for the DC universe. DC has some great titles that are not "name recognition" films: the current new 52 runs of "non-traditional" titles like Animal Man, Red Lanterns, even All Star Western would make great films.
WB needs to quit trying to make Justice League work and instead make some other great stories in the DC universe work.
That being said, I'm fine if they don't do that either as I am a-ok with just enjoying the actual comic books and Batman movies make a TON of money. But it would be nice if there was more thought than just reboot Batman, reboot Superman, Justice League.

There's almost nothing good you can say about that movie. I don't know, maybe (most of) the CGI was passable? I got nothing else.
It is not on the worst movies ever made, it isn't even one of the worst superhero movies ever made, but considering it's budget and what it could have been, should have been, it's just massively underwhelming.

In the comic, Cosmo is a Russian Cosmonaut dog who was launched into space and rescued by aliens, who proceed to up his intelligence by a factor of 100 and give him telepathy. He still dresses in his cosmonaut outfit and his telepathic talking has a Russian accent, like he says "Im thinkink about it". Its 5000 times more awesome then Im making it sound. Your supposed to think hes non threatening and silly, thats the point....then he fries your brain and leans over and says, with a Russian accent, "It is not polite to be laughing at Cosmo".

2015: Showdown between The Avengers 2 and Avatar 2.
Avengers 2 will make a truckload of money; Avatar 2 will make MUCH more.
'Sold on James Cameron's name' (who wasn't particularly a household name to the general public at that time - you know, the ones who buy the majority of tickets?)? LMAO.
Avatar 2 >>>Avengers 2/Joss Whedon/ Guardians of the Galaxy/ Iron Man 3/ TDK trilogy/ Christopher Nolan. You know it to be true. I predict a $3 billion worldwide gross.

Been here since before Harry's Godzilla review.
I remember a time when the garden variety AICN TB would be filled with posts of how something would or could end up being cool. Over years of decline, AICN TB has devolved into various ways how something is only bound to suck.
Why such a shift in cynicism? I have my suspicions as does any asshole. Yet two posts here give me hope and I suggest everyone read them.
I dunno how to hotlink a specific post, so swipe the following text and use your browser to search for the post.
Aug 18, 2012 4:30:35 PM CDT
Aug 18, 2012 10:54:43 PM CDT

I have some serious doubts - not that the comic fans won't go to see it. That'll happen, no sweat. But the characters and background seem too outre for the general public, and there's no "hook" to connect this movie with the prior Marvel universe projects. As such, it's going to be advertised as a slam-bang space-actioner with a lot of CGI that makes most mundanes go into "thousand-yard stare" mode and completely ignore it. Heck, even most comics fans went "Huh?!" when it was announced and had to look at IMdB to see who was actually going to be in the line-up before realizing that it wasn't the original team with Vance Astro, Charlie-27, Yondu, etc.

We're in for a great surprise. who knew iron man 1 would be amazing??? I think when it comes out good with the right director and actors behind it. everything falls into place.
Give the movie a chance, then bash it when it comes out.
I had such high hopes for green lantern But mistakes they made, ryan renolds, decent actor but not hal jordan im sorry. i just didnt buy it... Hal is mature like mid 30's. he doesnt look early 20's.
second. they brought the action back to earth which was bullshit. the green lantern books rarely focus on earth, if at any. They should have made the bad guy more impressive, parallax, a massive cloud of fear??? C'mon that is the most stupidest shit ive seen it didnt work in fantastic 4 it's not gonna workfor you either. Whoever thought of that should be kicked in the balls, hard! What they should have did was focus on sinestro and his turn to the darkside.
Mark strong played a great sinestro... That was the only thing worth watching the movie for. They could have just made it a first flight straght from the dvd to scren adaptation, i would have been happy.
Also they didnt even get into the guardians of oa. they're integral to the story and yet barely even shown... bullshit. ive could have wrote a better story in my sleep. and plus have the sequal of sinestro breaking out of jail and finding the yellow element making the building blocks of the sinestro corp!!!! that would have worked!

even Jar-Jar makes more sense. You guys are really trying to make sense, but all I see is "hate hate hate hate".
Look at it with an open mind. They will do sequels to all their heroes movies, they will do an Avengers movie plus Ant-Man origin (add to that Superman and maybe others on the way?). After that even the biggest superhero geek (like me) get that the chances are big the audiences can't take it anymore.
So they go into a completely different direction, but still stay inside their superhero world.

So when he was 14 Cameron conceived of a story that just happened to be Pocahontas/dances with wolves in space?
Look, I'm not some Avatar or Cameron, and I hate to use this term, hater. The only one of his movies I really haven't liked was Titanic, and thats only a story level.
But I would argue that the only truly original piece in Cameron's catalogue is the Abyss, which he did conceive as a teenager.
That doesnt take anything from him as a director. (or from Avatar, which i enjoyed, saw a couple of times, and still watch at home with reasonably frequency..and absolutely will go & see the sequel(s) ).

johnboy, you're not correct about James Cameron's original story conceptions and writing.
Read "The Futurist" by Rebecca Keegan, a Time magazine journalist's account of Cameron, for more information. It's a great book to read about James himself, but also a well-researched account of the behind-the-scenes drama that happened before, during, and after Cameron's films.
You'd probably enjoy it quite a bit.
The science he loved and the science fiction books he'd read influenced Cameron, but he wrote all his own screenplays. They were all his own original stories.
Harlan Ellison filed a lawsuit claiming "The Terminator" was a combination of two short stories he'd written, even though, when analyzed, the case Orion capitulated to for an "undisclosed amount of money" is silly and marginal.
The studio didn't want to cloud the release of their film, so paid Ellison without putting up a defense. Cameron was bullshit when he found out, since he had never read "Soldier" or "Demon With The Glass Hand" -- the stories Ellison claimed Cameron borrowed from -- before writing "The Terminator." And anyone who's those stories know they bear almost no resemblance at all to "The Terminator."
Plus Harlan Ellison is famous for being a spurious lawsuit-filing leech to being with.
Cameron wrote all his own screenplays.
Just wanted to clear that up.
As for "Guardians of the Galaxy," I wasn't sold on it until I read that James Gunn is coming aboard. Might give it a chance now.

All you dip shits worrying who the physical embodiment of Thanos will be are more retarded than the combined particapants of the Special Olympics. For fucks sakes NO human actor could fill that role AND have the voice and acting ability to do it right. That said I think someone like Frank Langella would bring the kind of soulful menace Thanos requires.

As a film fan, and a huge Marvel comics fan, I couldn't be happier about the way they're handling it. James Gunn would be a great choice.
Do I think it will do the numbers of the more recognizable Marvel-character movies? No. But it amazes me that the very same TBers who constantly rail on about how "modern movies are all predictable bullshit" are also the ones bitching about a major studio taking chances.
I seriously think you guys just NEED to bitch about every movie released. I guess it's uncool to be excited about movies now, but whatever. Me and all the other people in this Talkback who are excited about our stupid little Ent and talking-raccoon movie will be howling with enjoyment at the midnight premiere while you guys are home hate-posting on here about a movie you haven't seen. Have fun, I guess. We won't miss you.

Where are Adam Warlock, Vance Astro, and Nova? I used to read GotG in the '90s and they were one of my favorite teams of all time. I haven't read the most recent run, but friends tell me that Nova and Vance Astro are still involved. I don't see them in the poster, but, GOD, they have to be in the movie!!! Imagine Captain America's reaction to seeing someone else wield his shield from a millenium into the future! ...and Adam Warlock and Nova just kick ass!

I have read GOTG comic books, especially back in the 70s, 80s and early 90s when I was an avid comic reader. There's a reason it's never been popular.
The way the stories were crafted and the characters were written were very self-serving. Everything is intentionally conceived to avoid using technique that results in readers easily consuming the story. That's a long winded way of saying it's purposefully trying to be "artsy-fartsy". The problem is, whenever someone attempts to be artsy-fartsy it fails. Either someone naturally IS artsy-fartsy or they are not. So they put these poorly conceived characters together in a poorly conceived story-arc and said, "Well...if you don't like it, that means you just don't GET it..." Comic geeks love to say they GET something that nobody else does. So this is why it's well regarded ONLY in comic geek circles.
What I never understood was how there happened to be an anthropomorphized raccoon from another planet. He wasn't from Earth and had never been to Earth...so how did they EVER get the name raccoon? Just by chance this other planet has a creature that is absolutely identical to a creature on Earth AND named exactly raccoon, just as the English speaking people of Earth?
I really do hope it succeeds, but I don't know how much I'll enjoy it personally. It's a shame that Marvel has only this ONE comic that deals with cosmic stories...
• Fantastic Four
• Silver Surfer
• Starjammers
• Captain Marvel
• Inhumans
• ROM/Space Knights
• Quasar
•

Moondragon, Mantis and Mar Vells descendant area nor cic characters and I bet one of them, tops, makes the movie. And will be played by seine with big tits and no skills.... ScArlett Johannsen just ruins the Avemgers for me for this same reason

I don't know what recent retcon they've done to put them in modern times and frankly I don't give a shit. This is a stupid move by Disney/Marvel greedy for another Team movie blockbuster. They could have done another Hulk movie with Ruffalo(who everyone agrees stole Avengers). They could have done Black Panther(which I think Disney won't touch because they're scarred the mouth breathers who watch Fox News will associate T'Challa with Huey P and the more recent clown shoes imposters they've been giving so much press to.) So instead we get a Marvel movie verse where all the Black heroes are sidekicks and 5th string teams lead by talking Racoons get their own movie. No T'Challa, No new Hulk movie. This sucks. Fucking Disney always has to have talking animated animals in every fucking thing they make. Anyone with any damned sense knows the next logical team spin off would actually be The Defenders. Maybe that's why they were trying to get The Surfer back.

Like I said above, I still find this choice super-confusing. Why a lesser-known team than one of the other top shelf Marvel properties? But I'm curious, and waiting to see what happens. Some people seem somehow offended.
Of course, there's the folks who bitch about everything. Whatever, they're always here. But why are so many people seemingly personally upset about a fucking movie that hasn't even come out yet? When I see a movie I'm not interested in, I say "Hmm, not for me" and move on.
Step back from the ledge, guys. It's movie about a goddamn space raccoon.

Who is bitter? I am not negative about Marvel movies in general. I looked forward to Iron Man, Captain America, even Thor, and was thrilled to see them succeed, and doubly thrilled to see the Avengers movie succeed, both creatively and financially. As a Marvel fan, I want their movies to succeed, but my original reaction to the news of this GotG project was to be underwhelmed.
Marvel has a lot of material to work with and choose from, but this newer iteration of the GotG seems too obscure to me. I do not want it to fail, but I am concerned it might, especially with the broader non-comic fan audience.
It just seems to me that there are a lot of other Marvel properties that would be better choices than this to make a movie out of. Heroes for Hire, the Defenders, even the Inhumans seem to me to be properties that would have been better choices. Just my opinion.
Since they are making this movie, I hope it succeeds. As a Marvel fan, I am concerned that a failed movie might impair Marvels filmmaking momentum.
I am thrilled that Marvel has been doing so well, and hope they stay on a roll. But, I personally don't have much interest in these newer GotG characters. More power to you if you are a fan of these characters. I hope that this movie does well, but my first reaction was to simply be skeptical about the property. Just my opinion and my intial reaction.